tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 09 21:41:35 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: jabbI'IDwIj wa'DIch
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: KLBC: jabbI'IDwIj wa'DIch
- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 23:43:41 -0500
"pagh" writes:
>poH nI' qaStaHvIS jabbI'Id ghomvam vIlaDtaH.
<qaStaHvIS poH nI'> DaghItlhnIS.
{poH nI'} is the subject of {qaS}, and must follow it.
>DaH jISo'Ha' 'ej jIghItlh.
We have canon that indicates that {So'} is a transitive verb; {So'wI'} is
a cloaking device. To say "I unlurk" I'd use {jISo'Ha''egh}.
>pagh 'oH tlhIngan pongwIj'e' 'e' vIwIv.
>Eric Andeen 'oH tera'ngan pongwIj'e'.
It might just be personal preference, but I don't like the way these use
the word {'oH}. It just seems more right to me the other way around:
{thlIngan pongwIj 'oH pagh'e'}. Klingon's version of "to be" isn't the
same as English, and I think part of the difference is that while English
"to be" indicates identity, Klingon "to be" is more of a categorizer.
>Phoenix, Arizona-Daq jIyIn.
This seems to use a different meaning of "live" than I think {yIn} has.
I'd say {Phoenix ngan jIH} or {Phoenix-Daq 'oH juHwIj'e'}.
>yaHwIjDaq juHwIjDaq je De'wI'mey vIghun.
I need some opinions from the list at large here -- can locatives be
conjoined like this?
>wa'Hu' Hamlet vIHev. paqwIj 'oH cha'vatlh cha'maH cha'.
Again, I'm uncomfortable with this use of {'oH}. I think it's backwards.
You certainly need to put {-'e'} on the subject, and I think you need to
have something else for the number to attach to.
Maybe {paq cha'vatlh cha'maH cha' 'oH paqwIj'e'}.
>'IHchu'. De' boS be'nalwI' 'ej paqmey'e' Sovbej.
maj. jIyajchu'.
>pIp nav je QaQba' 'e' muja'.
The word order is wrong here. {QaQba'} must precede the subject.
And this sounds like an indirect quote, and Klingon doesn't have
those. {ja'} is a verb of saying, and is used with *direct* quotes.
This should be something like {QaQba' pIp nav je ja' ghaH}, meaning
"She says, 'the spine and paper are obviously good.'" (See the end
of TKD section 6.2.5)
>'ach Qu'meywIj vIta'be'taHvIS, paqwIj ghajtaH be'nalwI'. nom vIta'.
jIHagh. valqu' be'nallI'!
>This may be a bit more than a beginner can handle (that's up to
>ghunchu'wI' to decide),
batlh DaghItlhpu'! You have written with honor. You have a few glitches
in your grammar, but this is a fine start.
>In the future, if my Klingon is judged to be decent, I will dispense with
>the English in my Klingon messages.
The English translations help. If there's something ambiguous or badly
stated in the Klingon, knowing what you meant makes it possible to tell
the correct way to say it. But once you are sufficiently skilled that
you never :-) make stupid mistakes, there's no need for English at all.
>I'm going through David Barron's excellent postal course (slowly: I never
>was good with homework).
I never did take advantage of that course. Maybe I'll try it someday. :-)
>A note to ghunchu'wI': I have read your standard introduction many times,
>so I know who you (and many of the other illustrious tlhIngan Hol speakers)
>are. I started reading a bit before your promotion. And thanks for taking
>one of the leading contenders for my Klingon name {{:-)
I also program computers at home and at work, and I went by the pseudonym
"Hacker One" in college.
>I chose <pagh> as my Klingon name for three reasons:
>...2. It has an honored tradition: Commander Riker served aboard the
>Klingon Vessel Pagh in the TNG episode 'A Matter of Honor'. I also knew
>and admired a (non-Klingon) warrior who called himself 'zero'.
There is already a Klingon "pagh" around -- I hope we don't get confused.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj